Money Shot

AITOOW who thinks is poignant that a company that is a rehash of another company (Friendster, My Space) had to use some of its undeserved lucre on another company that is a rehash of another company (Hotmail, Skype)? People ask why would they do this deal. It's simple. They have a 13 year old novice at the helm who wants to support his legacy entity by co-opting/disrupting the economic viability of a subsidiary. It's done all the time by Empire builders. They absorb a finely constructed "militia" into their "army" and buy themselves a few more months/years of sustainability. Eventually they dissolve because they bankrupt themselves doing so, or the entity becomes unmanageable because there are too many acquired assets and/or those assets fight their overlords, each other or other acquired assets. History is replete with evidence of the consequences of this maneuver. It just shows that for all their (Millenials) talk of re-inventing the wheel, they are just like every other generation that believed that bigger is better and might makes right. I thought that "new technology" was going to makes us a nation of 1 and that size was no longer a metric.

Whenever I see these two dollar ideas purchases for billions, it makes me wonder why the corporate behemoth couldn't have re-engineered the idea in house. I mean that is how most of these companies got their start. They tweaked an existing platform (right Google?). I thought we told/discouraged all the "small guys" that they had to worry about the marketing might of the 'big, established" brands and the relatively low barriers to entry for all comers - a two front war. Try and get a small business loan and that's what they tell you before they reject your request. If this is the case, then why are these monoliths going off the reservation for solutions? They should be able use, say 19 billion, in advertising to steal your customer base not take a stcky load between their eyes.